Typology 4mfamsfam

8/3/2019 Typology 4mfamsfam

1/13

1

HousingModels:

Multiple Units,

Single Family

Appearance

Buildings that contain several units, but are designed to appear like one older

home, can be seen as more in character with some neighborhoods than either

row houses or walkup garden apartments. The strategy of achieving density

through this model represents a revision of older patterns once found in many

America cities of models and an application to new situations an old pre-

zoning pattern in many cities of having duplexes, Triplexes, and even largerplexes on corner sites, or within the shell of older buildings that have been

subdivided to create separate apartments within.

These types of buildings are often found between traditional single family

detached districts and commercial or apartment housing districts. They can

also be fond along the grand boulevards that trolleys traveled and once had

large estate homes. As wealthier families continued to move further out of the

cities, their former homes were often subdivided into apartments. New

apartments made to look like older homes were then used to fill in between the

older homes.

The case studies show that a wide range of densities can be achieved using this

building type, from 7 22 units per acre, mirroring the range of detached

homes. The case studies show how this type allowed for preservation of on-

site open space or the meeting of context requirements in a manner that would

not have been achieved using the detached house model.


2/13

2

Multiple

Units, Single

Family

Appearance


3/13

3

Multi Units, Single Family Appearance


4/13

4

Multi Units, Single Family Appearance


5/13

5

Lake Park Town homes, Issaquah, Washington

Case Study 11: Lake Park Townhomes 7.8 units per acre including street.

These homes are actually duplexes that are about the same density as the

Lyton Park detached homes, but show a different approach to the issue of scale

and context compatibility. The development of detached homes wasconsidered but rejected, as they would have appeared too small and closely

spaced compared to the surrounding homes in the Klahanie new town.

Duplexes also offered some construction and maintenance savings by being

attached along one party wall

These 14 duplex buildings provide 28 units of 1450 units each that fit into the

size and scale of the 3000 SF homes in the adjacent master planned

community. Large front setbacks and side setbacks copy of the patterns of the

neighboring homes. One basic plan has been used, but changes in window

placement, garage placement, porch forms, and and roof forms providevariety.

Large backyards are also a feature of the development


6/13

6

Battle Road Farm, Lincoln, Massachusetts

Case Study 12: Battle Road Farm, 10 units per acre including wetlands and commons

The 120 units at Battle Road Farm are developed in 34 separate buildings that are

designed to appear like traditional large New England homes and outbuildings. These

are laid out on a curving street system and inserted between existing mature trees tocreate a meandering village edge feeling that is compatible with the pattern of large

homes and estates found nearby.

The allusion to traditional architecture includes the use of familiar symmetrical main

homes, with a large front porch facing the street, and then attached lower and more

irregular outbuildings at the rear that mimic traditional add-ons that linked original

homes to their later carriage houses and small barns.

These homes contain 3 or 4 units each, with the structures paired so that uncovered

parking courts on one side provide both vehicular and pedestrian access to the side

and rear units, while all units have porches or access to the large shared side yard that

is shared by 6-8 facing units. While there are no fenced in individual yards, the

clustering of the units allowed for a sizable wetlands that occupies about 20% of 24

acre site, and a 120 foot by 550 foot green commons at the heart of the community.


7/13

7

Field Street, Detroit, Michigan

Case Study 13: Field Street, Detroit, 12 units per acre

The 21 units in duplex and quadruple structures along Field Street and Grand

Boulevard East replace previously razed structures, and are designed to match the very

large single family and duplex homes in the surrounding area.

The overall placement and shapes of the buildings match the context, which is

characterized by large rectangular homes with full width front porches, structures

raised up on semi-depressed basements, with a mixture of brick and wood siding and

historical styles.

The quadruple units look like large single family homes but actually contain four two

story units, with two accessed by way of the front porch, and two entered through

smaller side entries. On other lots, the units resemble nearby duplexes, or nearby row

houses, but all have the same setbacks and share the system of a rear alley that provides

access to parking


8/13

8

The Farm, Soquel Santa Cruz County

Case Study 14: The Farm, Soquel CA 13 units per acre including preserved meadow

field and community building

The farm is situated in a semi-rural area adjacent to existing large single family

homes, and the site required the preservation of a natural meadow. An old farmhouseon grounds that constituted almost half the site was preserved and renovated for use as

a childcare and community center. A guest parking lot was developed adjacent to the

old farmhouse

The new housing on an L shaped parcel opposite the farm house provides for 2 or

three town homes within each new farmhouse whose composition, materials, colors,

and detailing echoed the original renovated farmhouse. Some of these face the public

street, while others are arranged along a wide green commons at right angles to the

street.

Parking for the units is provided in an l shaped lot at the rear of the units. Individual

front porches provide the only private open space, but the commons and the open

fields around the restored farmhouse provide ample shared recreational open space,

which together constitute about 30% of the site. Without the inclusion of the field

and community building, the density of the housing and its attributable parking and

commons would be about 18 units per acre.


9/13

9

Great House, Fairfax County, Virginia

Case Study 15: Great House, Fairfax County, density varies with lot size: range 8-16

units per acre

The Great House is a building typology being utilized by market rate builders to meet

their required below market rate units in new large home subdivision throughout thecounty. The Great House incorporates two or four townhouses within one building

designed to look similar in scale and character to the adjacent market rate homes. In the

model pictured, the faade is designed to mask the several entries and provide some

asymmetrical elements to avoid looking like a standard duplex or fourplex. Middle units

have access to a third floor attic, and all units also have access to full basements below

and large decks behind. Parking is on surface lots at the rear of the building.

The overall composition and volume of the building fits into the typology of the area,

where one projecting wing may signify the living room, and the other contain a three car

garage entered from the side. Prior to the development of the Great House, the typicalsolution to the Affordable Dwelling Unit requirement had been the construction of

conventional townhouses and low-rise multi-family multi-plexes, both of which appeared

quite incompatible with the predominant single family detached homes and clearly

labeled the affordable housing as different and less desirable.

To date, two projects containing attached Great House units have been built in Fairfax

County - one with two units in a single building (the duplex model) and the other with

four units per building (the multiplex model).


10/13

10

Capen Green, Dorchester, Massachusetts

Case Study 16: Capen Green, Dorchester Mass. 17 units per acre

These ten duplexes provide similar size units as the Issaquah ho mes, but the house

forms allow for expansion by the owners who can convert unfinished basements and

attics to bonus rooms for their own use, or to create income producing secondary unitsover time. If all owners do install secondary units, the density will statistically

increase to 34 units per acre.

Buildings are alternative placed along the street front with a wide side facing the

street, then a narrower gabled side facing the street. This provided variety, and also

allowed for a closer spacing of the units along the street, allowing one more duplex in

a series of five than would have otherwise been possible. Additional variety is

economically provided by changing the location and direction of front porch stairs and

the style of porch details. The main simple rectangle homes feature modular

construction components, but look lie the traditionally built

The homes circle most of a common block, so they share common open space beyond

their own small yards. Parking did not have to be covered, so two cars are effectively

accommodated in tandem form on a private drive at one side of each building.


11/13

11

Sheridan Senior Estates, Mt Angel, Oregon

Sheridan Senior Estates, 18 units per acre

The development consists of seven cottage-style buildings that accommodate

fourteen two-bedroom rental units. The homes face inwards towards a

centrally located laundry/storage facility and a small community centerfeaturing two outdoor patios. The units were designed with two bedrooms to

provide additional space for a caregiver. The vaulted ceilings and combined

living, dining, kitchen alcove, provide large open, well-lit space in these

efficiently designed, small units.


12/13

12

Willows Infill Homes, Menlo Park

Case Study 17: Willows Homes, Menlo Park, 21 units per acre

The Willows development utilized several scattered sites in a neighborhood of large

old arts and crafts style homes. Using the standard 6000 Square foot lot, a basic

Triplex building type was developed, with porches, trellis, and fencing that varyfrom site to site. Units are sited so that they front a walkway at right angels to the

street, with uncovered parking in a common lot behind.

While the siting of the building is not typical for the immediate neighborhood, it is

a familiar solution historically. Within the wider community and the greater Bay

Area region, there are neighborhoods and streets that have narrow but deep lots on

which large homes have been built that are entered like the Willows from the side,

not from the front.

There are no fenced in private yards, but the community has nearby large parks, and

the walkways and entry areas sere as semiprivate open space. Small back areas on

the parking side also are used for social space, and both he parking area and the

front walk double as hard surface play areas.


13/13

13

Hyde Square Co-op, Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts

Case Study 18: Hyde Street Co-op, 22 units per acre

Like the Willows in Menlo Park, The Hyde Street Co-p is a scattered site infill

development, with 41 units in 17 buildings. Three different building types were

developed. These included including two different duplex (stacked flats) modelslooking like large single family houses with some bedrooms of the upper unit under a

steep pitched roof. The third building type is a three unit three story flat roofed

building building resembling the triple-Decker stacked flats that also exist in the

area. The neighborhood pattern of curving and angled streets and irregular lot depths

meant that unlike the Menlo Park project no tow sites were alike and presented a

major site planning challenge. The house style duplexes were sited on the narrower

lots or sideways on shallow corner lots. The triple decker buildings containing two

two-story flats over one single level apartment were in a wider but shallower building

type, so better suited to the wide but shallow lots in the area.

All ground floor units have some rear yard area, and all units on upper floors have

large porches to compensate for their lack of private yards.

Parking is provided in a variety of patterns, including a mix ofshared lots at the side

or rear of clustered buildings, and some group parking across the street from buildings

on lots to small or narrow to have on-site parking.

Typology 4mfamsfam

Documents

Transcript of Typology 4mfamsfam